posted at 6:01 pm on May 1, 2013 by Allahpundit

Even knowing that most reporters are pro-reform, I can’t believe they’re taking this lame gambit semi-seriously.

Mickey Kaus is right, of course. Not remotely is this an obstacle to passing the Gang of Eight bill. If anything, it’s a little nudge towards passage from Schumer and company.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) has told advocates that he will offer an amendment during the bill markup next week allowing gay Americans to sponsor their foreign-born partners for green cards, just as heterosexual couples can. The measure is likely to pass because Democrats face pressure from gay rights advocates to deal with it in committee, rather than on the Senate floor, where the odds of passage are far less favorable…

“It will virtually guarantee that [the bill] won’t pass,” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a member of the Gang of Eight negotiating group, told POLITICO in a brief interview. “This issue is a difficult enough issue as it is. I respect everyone’s views on it. But ultimately, if that issue is injected into this bill, the bill will fail and the coalition that helped put it together will fall apart.”…

Democrats, led by Leahy and the party’s progressive allies, are expected to make the high-risk push because they aren’t convinced that Republicans would ultimately abandon the measure if it includes protections for same sex couples. The GOP made similar threats about the Violence Against Women Act before Congress passed a version that covered victims of domestic violence in same sex relationships, advocates point out.

This is what’s known as ginning up a “demand” for the express purpose of conceding it later for strategic reasons. Maybe Leahy will get it through committee, just to show the party’s liberal base that Senate Democrats are all about gay rights in case that wasn’t abundantly clear yet. At that point, Republicans will have veto power. If a quick whip count reveals that Rubio’s right about this provision tanking the bill, rest assured that Leahy and Chuck Schumer will find a way procedurally to have it stripped out, replete with plenty of assurances to the left that amnesty will eventually be extended to gay couples after the bill is signed into law. Then the GOP can declare another lame “victory” with which to supposedly impress conservatives. Kaus knows kabuki when he sees it:

For example, the amendment could be offered on the Senate floor, where it would fail to get the necessary 60 votes but allow Democrats and some Republicans to go on record in seeming support. Or the gay provision makes it into the bill, but the bill itself fails to get 60 votes. Then the Dems take out the provision and have another vote. Or the amendment gets removed in conference with the House, giving Democratic senators a “yes” vote on the initial bill and Republicans a subsequent. ”concession” they can use as cover for a final pro-amnesty vote.

That last thing, I suspect, is the real purpose of the gay dispute. The Kabuki of Amnesty not only includes fake fights between Marco Rubio and the President, and fake anti-Obama ads praising the Republican senators who support Obama’s immigration approach, but also the creation of fake threats that can then be used as bargaining chips with gullible conservatives (or fake-gullible conservatives)…

Opponents of amnesty, in particular shouldn’t fall for that false hope,. The amnesty side isn’t about to fumble.. They will have to be beaten on the ground, on the core failings of the bill (“border security or guest workers or …the path to citizenship”–the concerns Carrie Budoff Brown dismisses). The gay issue only can only divert attention and energy from those core debates.

All true, but there’s more to it than that. Total Democratic victory on immigration doesn’t just mean enacting a path to citizenship with phony border security provisions. It means preserving certain grievances against the GOP that can be used against them in 2014 and beyond to keep core Democratic constituencies alienated when Republicans try to build on the “goodwill” they’ll have allegedly earned by passing this thing. Rest assured, if the bill becomes law with a 15- to 20-year citizenship path, amnesty shills will waste no time afterward slamming the GOP for such a draconian demand at the expense of poor “undocumented” Mexicans. The “gay couple” amendment works similarly. Legalized gay marriage is famously popular among younger voters, whom Democrats depend on, but also increasingly popular among Latinos, especially younger Latinos whose political identity might not have solidified yet. (According to some polls, a majority of Latino voters already support legal recognition of SSM.) Democrats don’t care if the “gay couple” provision passes, they care about voters noting that they tried to pass it and that it was the GOP that stopped it cold. Frankly, given the minor trend towards public support for SSM by some Senate Republicans like Rob Portman and Mark Kirk, it’s not a bad idea strategically for the Dems to call Rubio’s bluff on trying to pass the bill with the “gay couples” amendment as part of it. Maybe they can get to 60 with it in there and claim an even bigger victory for their base. If they can’t, great — they’ll use the GOP’s opposition as an attack point later. Either way, in no sense is this amendment an “obstacle” to passage. One side or the other will cave.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

So give it up and LEARN SPANISH! You should probably all buy Mexican flags too and fly them in your front yard and on your pickup trucks. If you already have an American flag there it is alright if you keep it, as long as you fly it upside down and below our great Mexican flag. Now repeat after me – I pledge allegiance to the flag of the Estados Unidos del Mucho Grande Mexico, and to the Republic for which it use to stand, one nation under us, with everything for us, and nothing anymore for you except to pay mucho mucho mucho more taxes for our tax credits. And remember Gringos, APRENDER EL ESPANOL!!!

NoBordersJose on May 1, 2013 at 6:48 PM

Hey Hot Air administrator, you need to install a BS filter on this site.

I think both Rush and Levin had such high hopes for Rubio. I know I did. It’s tough to walk away, I can see wanting to give him another chance. The sad thing is that he is wasting capital on he himself said won’t get through the House.

Cindy Munford on May 1, 2013 at 6:51 PM

Rubio like most politicians is an opportunist…And he chose Identity Politics over Constitutional Principle and Conservative Common Sense.

There can be no immigration reform without securing the border first.

Immigration Reform doesn’t have to equate amnesty…never did.

The immigration courts need serious reform but that would cut into the lucrative business of the lawyers.

The Colonias along the border need to be cleaned out…But that would cut into the lucrative businesses that keep them running, screwing both the state and the illegals and again providing money to the advocate groups from California and more lawyers.

What is sad is the fact that Rubio was a tea party candidate who we all cheered for beating Crist. He turned on us. We know that now.
But, then, you have McCain, who has done nothing but stab is in the back, along with his girl, Lindsey, And they still got re-elected. I’m hoping people get smart in SC and vote in at least a republican. These two are no surprise and yet, they STILL have a seat to rule us.

I’m looking for someone who is too smart to fall into the politician trap while smart enough to recognize political opportunity. I think I’m asking too much. In the end you vote for the lesser of two evils and that isn’t how you rebuild a nation as beautiful as ours.

Rubio fails to grasp that Obama and the liberals are simply unwilling to enforce ANY laws that secure the border.

They will take any “pathway to citizenship” opening of a new immigration bill, no matter how well crafted, and simply drive a truck through it. They will dare the GOP to stop them and if anyone tries, the left will hound the courts until they find liberal judges to give them their way.

Rubio is a HUGE dupe. He assumes that Schumer and company are honest brokers. They ARE NOT. There are no longer honest brokers on the Democrat side.

The fact is, there is no “partner for peace” here. The other side has no honest brokers. Liberals lie, cheat, and deceive, right to your face. The fact that Rubio hasn’t grasped that is proof that he is too naive even for the office he currently has.

Pray for the republic. Our enemies are ruthless and our friends are naive. SIGH.

I’m looking for someone who is too smart to fall into the politician trap while smart enough to recognize political opportunity. I think I’m asking too much. In the end you vote for the lesser of two evils and that isn’t how you rebuild a nation as beautiful as ours.

Cindy Munford on May 1, 2013 at 7:09 PM

Well…Picking and choosing the battles is a vital skill.

Currently Marco Rubio has stepped on his D*ck over Identity Politics.

Paul Ryan (A staunch Catholic) has now evolved on Gay adoptions…so he’s shrinking to a small “c” Catholic.

Rand Paul is good except when the ghost of Daddy’s upbringing rears it’s ugly little head…

So far Ted Cruz and Mike Lee have stayed solid…but Congress is a cesspool like something out of Dante’s Inferno so time will tell.

I think it’s a safe bet that millions of illegals will EVOLVE into gayness. GOP duped into compromise with the cancerous Dems, but they’ll just keep changing the rules. They’ll take & take until there’s no fingerprint of the GOP on this bill. What a nightmare this is going to be.

What is sad is the fact that Rubio was a tea party candidate who we all cheered for beating Crist. He turned on us. We know that now.
But, then, you have McCain, who has done nothing but stab is in the back, along with his girl, Lindsey, And they still got re-elected. I’m hoping people get smart in SC and vote in at least a republican. These two are no surprise and yet, they STILL have a seat to rule us.

RovesChins on May 1, 2013 at 7:05 PM

Rubio is a Floridian…so his perspective on Immigration is Floridian.

It’s interesting that none of the Border State Governors (Especially the State with the longest border…That would be Perry of Texas) were consulted…

I think it’s a safe bet that millions of illegals will EVOLVE into gayness. GOP duped into compromise with the cancerous Dems, but they’ll just keep changing the rules. They’ll take & take until there’s no fingerprint of the GOP on this bill. What a nightmare this is going to be.

They need to secure the border and they need to follow through on the findings of e-verify. I know they need to make it easier to get permits to come work here, a lot of these folks pay coyotes more than they would pay in fees to come here legally. Let them make some good faith moves before we get snookered again like Reagan. This is one of those fool me twice deals where unfortunately a lot of nice hardworking people are going to suffer.

Start there is what I say. Don’t do anything until the laws are followed, beg. at the borderd and ending at the employers’ companies.
Schadenfreude on May 1, 2013 at 7:33 PM
Your intent is to deport 11-12 million people then?
hawkdriver on May 1, 2013 at 7:37 PM

Oh, come on? Really?
E-Verify for jobs, all jobs, and all benefits. 2/3 of Mexicans here legally never apply for citizenship per Pew. They already have a country, they just want to play with your wallet. When the host dries up, they will leave for the homeland.
As far as border security? Remember 1986? Yeah.

But they have passed border security in the past and it still isn’t happening. I think McCain called it the “GD fence” during the campaign and then promptly ignored it after his reelection. I know your interaction with these folks has been positive, mine has to, although I don’t know if they were legal or not. It just isn’t the point anymore. Washington will do it right if we make them, if we don’t they will just do the part they like and ignore the remedies that will stop this from happening over and over and over again.

While supporters of the bill trumpet its “border security” features, in reality, the law delivers nothing new—other than the promise of spending a lot more money and running up our debt.
The bill trashes fiscal discipline, exploiting “a loophole in the Budget Control Act (BCA) that allows Congress to spend more than allowed under the spending caps adopted in 2011.”
In other words, Washington is willing to draft a bounced check to justify an amnesty bill.
To make matters worse, there is very little likelihood that that Americans will get much for the next border security buck spent.
The Secretary of Homeland Security has repeatedly stated that our borders “have never been more secure.” In the past five years, the White House has never asked for this additional border security funding. Yet, this bill lavishes billions of additional spending on the department with no clear requirements on how the money is spent. At least $2 billion could legitimately be labeled the Secretary’s slush fund.

This is an awful bill. It’s worse than the 2007 one. There will be no sealed border. There will be no enforcement of the new laws, just like there is no enforcement of the current ones.

RovesChins on May 1, 2013 at 8:03 PM
No, he just doesn’t want to hurt people that he has worked with and have garnered his respect. A lot of these folks are co-workers and neighbors.
Cindy Munford on May 1, 2013 at 8:06 PM

Yeah, they’re lowering wages and destroying middle class neighborhoods by turning them into Little Mexico or Little Guatemala. Now, I doubt Hawk has to worry about any illegals taking his job or even lowering the wage, but a lot of citizens do. I’m also quite sure that fancy cabin isn’t anywhere NEAR the filth that was once a great neighborhood and now looks like Tijuana.
Perspective is your friend, Hawk.

I’m not really going on the folks working for me, Cindy. I’m actually going on the bill itself as discussed today on the Hannity program that I guess Vordaj listened to also. I’m actually looking on line for the full text of the proposals in the bill.

I honestly wouldn’t jeopardize my nations security over a couple guys working for my GC.

There is a bottom line. The fact is that there are a Conservatively estimated 1-12 million illegal aliens in this country and we need to do something. If the consensus of conservatives said to send them home, I’d be on board. How would we do that though. Barring doing that, what do we do. Rubio’s proposals on their face, seem pretty tough.

I think both Rush and Levin had such high hopes for Rubio. I know I did. It’s tough to walk away, I can see wanting to give him another chance. The sad thing is that he is wasting capital on he himself said won’t get through the House.

Cindy Munford on May 1, 2013 at 6:51 PM

Cindy, you are far too kind. That would have been like giving Benedict Arnold a second chance. Arnold, like Rubio, was personable and was on our side before he became a traitor. I am sure Limbaugh and Levin would have talked about how, down deep, Arnold was a true American and just supporting the British because he knew they couldn’t win.

And…how about the people waiting in line in their home countries who have done the paperwork, paid the fees, and watch as a bunch of border jumping criminals get to live here and work her with a path to citizenship?
Next, he will be saying they are building the houses and working at the spas and hospitality that Americans, the 25 million out of work, won’t do.
Give me a break.

It doesn’t matter. Pass or fail they will only do the parts that get them something. And it’s not just immigration, it’s gun laws also. They can’t be bothered to go after people who have guns illegally so they just write laws to make it harder for law abiding people to have them. They write a bunch of gobbely goop that no one understands and then ignore it. Don’t you wonder why none of the people who ran the banks and financial institutes that we bailed out were prosecuted? And all the while, you and I work to pay more taxes to patch the holes in a sinking ship.

I am so sick of the gay narrative. I understand you wanting to live in peace and acceptance. Well, do it, you don’t need any more laws. You can bequeath to who you want, you can select who visits you in hospitals. Get out of my face and my life. 4% of the people are not going to run my life, my morals and my pocketbook. Just shut up and live.

The guns are a non-brainer. It’s the only thing standing between us and being run over roughshod by this administration. The discussion in congress now though, is the immigration bill. If I had my way the laws would be enforced and illegals sent home. That will never happen though. The next step is to ask what are you willing to accept that is possible to do.

Perspective is your friend, Hawk.
RovesChins on May 1, 2013 at 8:11 PM
A lot of times, you have to look past some comments and think, everyone flies off the handle once and a while without thinking through what they’ve posted.
I wouldn’t think of telling that to a fellow conservative in a million years. Are you serious about all that? For asking a simple question?
hawkdriver on May 1, 2013 at 8:18 PM

Have you lived in a neighborhood where a ‘boss’ installs his workers, six families to a single family home, or twenty men to a one family home and that neighborhood descending into chaos with loud music, loud parties, lewd behavior, and lawlessness brought from the home country?
Didn’t think so. That’s what I meant. You will never compete with an illegal for a job, but some have to compete as a business owner with those companies that break the law and hire illegal labor. Competition is out with that lawlessness.
Your question, Hawk, was beneath you. You’re smarter than that, man.
People mouthing the words of democrats will cause a conservative to fly off the handle.

I had to fill out an e-verify. Now I hear it is racist and discriminatory. It really doesn’t matter what I think I could put up with because they do what they please. So saying “NO” to everything and ruining some political careers is all I have. The interesting thing is that I bet I feel just as powerless as the illegals do.

This is all becoming 2005 all over again..I don’t blame Rubio for giving it a try..And I think he is sincere..But this is going to go nowhere..Hopefully Rubio sees this is starting to fall apart and will get out..:)

Two things I disagreed with Reagan on, amnesty and giving the Panama Canal back to Panama. Neither was the end of the world.
Cindy Munford on May 1, 2013 at 8:32 PM

The amnesty wasn’t the end, but ir was a brick in the road to a worse situation. Down another road, Panama could be a problem still. If we’ve learned anything over the years it’s not a stable, static world when it comes to friends and foes and things have a way of coming back to gnaw on the backside.

Have you lived in a neighborhood where a ‘boss’ installs his workers, six families to a single family home, or twenty men to a one family home and that neighborhood descending into chaos with loud music, loud parties, lewd behavior, and lawlessness brought from the home country?

Are you under the impression I grew up with some silver spoon in my mouth. Everything I have, I earned on the way up pulling on bootstraps. As a kid, I lived in a run-down farmhouse I wouldn’t have felt comfortable inviting a friend over to visit at. Three boys in one room and we burned and buried our trash. Ever get your Christmas gifts from the Rotary’s Club?

Is that where you’ve come from? Dude, all I have, I owe the US Military and my own initiative.

Didn’t think so.

You’d think wrong.

That’s what I meant. You will never compete with an illegal for a job, but some have to compete as a business owner with those companies that break the law and hire illegal labor. Competition is out with that lawlessness.
Your question, Hawk, was beneath you. You’re smarter than that, man.
People mouthing the words of democrats will cause a conservative to fly off the handle.

RovesChins on May 1, 2013 at 8:29 PM

Which question was beneath me? The one where I asked what are we going to do with 11-12 million illegals?

Which question was beneath me? The one where I asked what are we going to do with 11-12 million illegals?
hawkdriver on May 1, 2013 at 8:46 PM

You posed it from the left’s usual dismissive rant, – the long version is usually sumthin like “You can’t round up whatever million, put them in buses and ship them back!” (i.e. the strawman nature of it made people wonder)

hawkdriver on May 1, 2013 at 8:46 PM
You posed it from the left’s usual dismissive rant, – the long version is usually sumthin like “You can’t round up whatever million, put them in buses and ship them back!” (i.e. the strawman nature of it made people wonder)

whatcat on May 1, 2013 at 8:52 PM

I’m not going to play the “prove it’s not a straw-man game” with anyone. Are there 11-12 million illegal aliens in this country or not? If you don’t think there are. Fine. I guess my question would then constitute a straw-man argument.

If there are indeed 11-12 million living here and you’re just ignoring the fact, I’m not sure what to tell you. What I do know is if conservatives don’t have an answer, the donks do. And that’s total amnesty.

You folks know me. I’m not trying to be provocative or start arguments. If this isn’t something that we can discuss, just let me know.

hawkdriver on May 1, 2013 at 8:02 PM

Any honest discussion assumes everybody acknowledges all the facts. Too often the false dichotomy of, “We can’t deport them all, THEREFORE we must legalize them” ignores the most ethical, efficient, economical, just and POPULAR strategy — attrition through enforcement.

Attrition has been mentioned mucho times on this site by me and many others. Newt, among many others, repeated this false dichotomy last year in the debates when he said, “What are you going to do, deport grandma?”

READ THIS POLL. Study the demographics. Read up on the SAVE Act, which has just been introduced for the third time. Second time it got 200+ cosponsors, but Pelosi would not allow a vote.

And if you think the poll is too old, find another poll that also offers all three choices — most polls offer 3 or 4 flavors of amnesty versus mass deportations, ignoring the most popular choice.

What I do know is if conservatives don’t have an answer, the donks do. And that’s total amnesty.

Pick your poison.

hawkdriver on May 1, 2013 at 8:58 PM

Yes, we do have an answer.

See my previous post on attrition and the SAVE Act, which was introduced twice under Pelosi by Heath Shuler, (Bluedog – NC). About 100 Dem’s and 100 Rep’s cosponsored it. They all believed in attrition through law enforcement. (But not pelosi). We will see if Boehner beleives in law enforcement – he let Lamar Smith’s E-Verify bill die last session.

And if you seriously want to learn about this policy, go check NumbersUSA aznd read up on this strategy. To continually ignore the most popular strategy is at best disingenuous.

I for one think it is possible to deport 11 million people. Whether it is the right thing to do is a different question. I say we give each a card that says “illegal alien” and a SS type number so they can at least pay taxes and we can keep better track of them. Deport the ones with records in their home county, break the law here, or have radical ties, or are caught voting or frauding the welfare system. Anyone who came in at younger than 18 can have a work permit. Close the border except to commercial goods. No chain migration. Slowly raise the legal immigration quota for highly skilled or educated people.

(Please excuse if this is a double-post,I think the filter may have taken exception to a now-modified term in the first try)

You posed it from the left’s usual dismissive rant, – the long version is usually sumthin like “You can’t round up whatever million, put them in buses and ship them back!” (i.e. the strawman nature of it made people wonder)
whatcat on May 1, 2013 at 8:52 PM

I’m not going to play the “prove it’s not a straw-man game” with anyone. Are there 11-12 million illegal aliens in this country or not?If you don’t think there are. Fine. I guess my question would then constitute a straw-man argument.
hawkdriver on May 1, 2013 at 8:58 PM

You missed my point, I believe someone else also brought it up. You’re making up other people’s argument; that’s a strawman. It’s like if you are against the anti-gun proposals and someone says “So you want more school mass murders”?

I believe what people are saying if we need new laws, they should be enforced “tough on crime” laws. What we are talking about here is the equivalent of thinking that if banks just wouldn’t have locked doors or guards it will solve the problem of bank robbery.
It’s bassackwards reasoning.

By the way, did you know that in the first year of “Operation W—–k” over 1 million illegals were sent back? Obviously someone didn’t know it couldn’t be done.

And note that they only deported 50,00 the first few weeks, but that influenced another 488,000 to self-deport. Nice ratio!!!

So if we START mandatory and universal E-Verify, we should get the same ratio.

Same thing happens when you see a police car on the highway.

Then on June 17, 1954, what was called “Operation Wetback” began. Because political resistance was lower in California and Arizona, the roundup of aliens began there. Some 750 agents swept northward through agricultural areas with a goal of 1,000 apprehensions a day. By the end of July, over 50,000 aliens were caught in the two states. Another 488,000, fearing arrest, had fled the country.

I read some of that essay. You may want to read it again as the person that wrote that is wrong, period. For example, tolerance is not acceptance. Ask the Florist what happened to them when they did not “Accept”. Oh, and this person said the Constitution & the Bill of Rights are not for the majority, but the minority. What?

O/T Anyone listening to Mark Levin? He just busted McConnell/McCain etc on working behind the scenes on Immigration. And doing so he is the one that talked Rubio to join the gang of 8, thinking he’d draw the Conservatives to support this. Also Gates, Google head & Facebook head are funding a lot of ads to support the pro-Immigration bill. The organizations utilize the word “Conservative” and at least one ad has Rubio in it.

I hope Hispanics are watching this ploy and understanding what is being done. Apparently, the Democrats fear the House just might pass this puppy so they have to add a poison pill to the mix just to make sure it doesn’t get the votes.

My question, if they poison the well enough, will they be able to get Democrats to vote for it? Of course they will, under the assurance that it won’t pass the House.

I hope Hispanics are watching this ploy and understanding what is being done. Apparently, the Democrats fear the House just might pass this puppy so they have to add a poison pill to the mix just to make sure it doesn’t get the votes.

My question, if they poison the well enough, will they be able to get Democrats to vote for it? Of course they will, under the assurance that it won’t pass the House.

Rubio told Laura Ingraham that the reported “MarcoPhone” was “not for the illegal immigrant,” but ” for the US citizens and residents who live along the border.” But according to the legislation that he helped write, those “residing” along the border are not identified as being U.S. Citizens or even U.S. residents. So what’s ‘it going to be, Marco?

Maybe Marco should have clarified this in the bill, perhaps inserting a start date to establish residency?

Rubio fails to grasp that Obama and the liberals are simply unwilling to enforce ANY laws that secure the border.

Whitewolf7070

Rubio grasps it well. He doesn’t want the border secured either.

Can you lay out for me what part of the Rubio Immigration proposal you can’t accept?

hawkdriver

Start on page one, and read to the end…page 844 I think. That should cover the unacceptable parts.

How would you change it?

hawkdriver

Tearing it up would be a good start.

Your intent is to deport 11-12 million people then?

hawkdriver

The intent is to encourage them to go home, discourage others from coming, and deport the ones we catch as opposed to rewarding them for it. Not complicated.

He asserts there is no bill without border security.

hawkdriver

And he’s lying. The bill doesn’t require a single piece of border security.

The fact is that there are a Conservatively estimated 1-12 million illegal aliens in this country and we need to do something.

hawkdriver

More like 20 million. And unfortunately, we’re not talking about only the folks in this country…another little tidbit Marco leaves out during his “push for amnesty” tour. Once family members, gay people, refugees, and those who have already been deported are thrown in, the number will be close to 30-40 million. But yeah, Rubio keeps saying it’s only 11 million, knowing full well the bill isn’t limited to only those here. In other words, he’s lying. But I’m sure he’s being honest when he says the bill addresses the border, lol.

No, we don’t need to just do something. We need to do something that addresses the issue. We don’t need to commit national AND political suicide in the name of doing something, and that’s what Rubio’s amnesty plan does.

What I do know is if conservatives don’t have an answer, the donks do. And that’s total amnesty.

Pick your poison.

hawkdriver

Umm, this bill IS total amnesty(actually it’s better than amnesty), and Rubio the republican is the head spokesmen for it. And who cares if the donks have an answer anyway? It doesn’t magically become law if they have an answer and we don’t. Heck, they have bad answers for every issue facing the country, but that doesn’t mean we have to offer our own bad answer, or go along with theirs.

The bottom line is this whole immigration idea is for the Dems to have the votes for control of the W.H., House & Senate.

Rubio said on Rush’s show & Levins that the Dems are going to have an Immigration bill and we need an alternative. So, he at McConnell & McCains urging working behind the scenes(per Levin) McConnell talked Rubio into joining the Gang.

Wonder who McCain & McConnell are supporting for President in 2016.
Evidently it isn’t Rubio, LOL Nice way to “help” him out & get rid of him and any idea Rubio may have had on running for President.

This if passed will destroy our nation, if there is anything left after Obamacare goes into effect in Jan. 2014. Too bad Rubio drank the koolaid. I thot he was smarter than that.

You missed my point, I believe someone else also brought it up. You’re making up other people’s argument; that’s a strawman. It’s like if you are against the anti-gun proposals and someone says “So you want more school mass murders”?

I’m not sure why you’re fixated on characterizing my comment as a “straw-man”. I understand it’s a popular way to refuse to answer or acknowledge a question.

I believe what people are saying if we need new laws, they should be enforced “tough on crime” laws. What we are talking about here is the equivalent of thinking that if banks just wouldn’t have locked doors or guards it will solve the problem of bank robbery.
It’s bassackwards reasoning.

Then you’re finally providing the answer I asked. You seem to advocate sending them back. Which is fine. What was tough about saying that?

By the way, did you know that in the first year of “Operation W—–k” over 1 million illegals were sent back? Obviously someone didn’t know it couldn’t be done.

whatcat on May 1, 2013 at 9:24 PM

That’s great. How many are left? It doesn’t work in liberal enclaves where they ignore federal law. I’d support tough laws. The gop just needs to put them out there as their alternative.

Can you lay out for me what part of the Rubio Immigration proposal you can’t accept?

hawkdriver
Start on page one, and read to the end…page 844 I think. That should cover the unacceptable parts.

How would you change it?

hawkdriver
Tearing it up would be a good start.

Your intent is to deport 11-12 million people then?

hawkdriver
The intent is to encourage them to go home, discourage others from coming, and deport the ones we catch as opposed to rewarding them for it. Not complicated.

He asserts there is no bill without border security.

hawkdriver
And he’s lying. The bill doesn’t require a single piece of border security.

The fact is that there are a Conservatively estimated 1-12 million illegal aliens in this country and we need to do something.

hawkdriver
More like 20 million. And unfortunately, we’re not talking about only the folks in this country…another little tidbit Marco leaves out during his “push for amnesty” tour. Once family members, gay people, refugees, and those who have already been deported are thrown in, the number will be close to 30-40 million. But yeah, Rubio keeps saying it’s only 11 million, knowing full well the bill isn’t limited to only those here. In other words, he’s lying. But I’m sure he’s being honest when he says the bill addresses the border, lol.

No, we don’t need to just do something. We need to do something that addresses the issue. We don’t need to commit national AND political suicide in the name of doing something, and that’s what Rubio’s amnesty plan does.

What I do know is if conservatives don’t have an answer, the donks do. And that’s total amnesty.

Pick your poison.

hawkdriver
Umm, this bill IS total amnesty(actually it’s better than amnesty), and Rubio the republican is the head spokesmen for it. And who cares if the donks have an answer anyway? It doesn’t magically become law if they have an answer and we don’t. Heck, they have bad answers for every issue facing the country, but that doesn’t mean we have to offer our own bad answer, or go along with theirs.

xblade on May 1, 2013 at 11:23 PM

Not even sure where to start. I’ll just say I’m not sold on any plan to fix the large tide of illegal aliens in this country. The only gop member that has a plan to even discuss was Rubio. I came to the thread to discuss it to see what people thought. I’m still confused as to why that’s seemingly provocative to others here.

The key points that Rubio spoke of in his legislation fined the alien and compelled them to pay any previous income taxes to stay, set a 5 year and then to 10 probational period where they are only here on work status. It stated they can’t apply for a green card until then. They additionally have to pass a background check and can’t stay with a criminal record. In all, under the plan they claim it takes 13 years for them to be able to petition for citizenship. That’s stated in the bill. What Rubio stated in the interview I listened to was that they cannot proceed past anyone who has petitioned their way here legally under a visa.

If you dismiss everything stated by claiming it’s all a lie by Rubio, not much room left to discuss any approach to fixing the problem. I’m just finding it remarkable that people seem to be both afraid to discuss any plan and inversely afraid to put their foot down and state they think the remedy is sending them back.

Attrition requires only the will of Washington, DC, to enforce our existing federal laws.

fred5678 on May 1, 2013 at 9:12 PM

That’s fine. Advocate that. To a different point, I’m not ignoring anything. I’m not just advocating. That rises to dishonestly in your book?

blockquote>To continually ignore the most popular strategy is at best disingenuous.

fred5678 on May 1, 2013 at 9:20 PM continually ignore the most popular strategy is at best disingenuous.

There might be a logic hole here big enough to pilot the USS Debt thru.

tom daschle concerned on May 1, 2013 at 9:27 PM

Disingenuous too? Please.

I’m not going to make it personal, but a lot of immigrants returned to their countries (specifically 1.4 million Mexicans) for a lot of the reasons you stated but also because of the downturn in the economy. I’ll refrain from insinuating dishonesty or disingenuousness because you didn’t mention that.

To be clear for all of the commenters here that seem predisposed to emotional responses rather than a more rational exchange, I’m not for amnesty. I don’t claim to know everything and I certainly don’t understand everyone’s position of the subject. It’s why I asked what people thought of the Rubio bill.
I even asked if anyone knew where there was a full text. Didn’t get an answer. I did find one and a summary on the Center for Immigration Studies page.

hawkdriver on May 1, 2013 at 8:46 PM
First. My point exactly. You EARNED everything you own. Illegals you are questioning on how we will deport cut the line, didn’t earn citizenship, didn’t earn the rights they DEMAND.

And, the question that you are way above:
Deporting 11-12 million illegals? Yeah, that is right off any libtard’s talking points when they are discussing illegal immigration.

RovesChins on May 1, 2013 at 8:59 PM

I don’t know, fred5678 had an answer.

You and whatcat both assume a lot if you assume the reason I asked what to do about millions of illegal immigrants, was that I’m using some liberal canard as an argument to making it legal for them to stay. I might say the comment about my home and occupation was beneath you.

hawkdriver on May 1, 2013 at 8:46 PM
First. My point exactly. You EARNED everything you own. Illegals you are questioning on how we will deport cut the line, didn’t earn citizenship, didn’t earn the rights they DEMAND.
And, the question that you are way above:
Deporting 11-12 million illegals? Yeah, that is right off any libtard’s talking points when they are discussing illegal immigration.
RovesChins on May 1, 2013 at 8:59 PM
I don’t know, fred5678 had an answer.
You and whatcat both assume a lot if you assume the reason I asked what to do about millions of illegal immigrants, was that I’m using some liberal canard as an argument to making it legal for them to stay. I might say the comment about my home and occupation was beneath you.
hawkdriver on May 2, 2013 at 7:41 AM

You could have saved yourself a bonus word and understood that the ‘deport 11-12 million invaders is impossible’ is just a liberal talking point. It’s part of the parrot classes’ go to line when they have nothing else. We can deport through attrition. We’re not talking busses and trains here. The money dries up, so does the magnet.
And, my point about your success…you will never have the pleasure of watching an illegal alien urinate on his own house as he wades through the trash from the extra loud party that boomed into the late night hours. And, the fact that you EARNED everything you enjoy now. These invading lawbreakers didn’t earn the rights they now demand.

I’m not sure what you mean by “bonus word”. Are we limited in the number of exchanges? And really, how many more insinuations are you going to make about the manner in which I exchange comments here? Parrot class and nothing else now? Whenever you’re ready to return to a more reasoned discussion, fire away.

I never said we could deport 11-12 million illegal aliens. I didn’t use it as a liberal debate device to advocate amnesty. No matter how many ways you try to imply I did, it doesn’t make it so. It’s already been established the illegals move back and forth with the economy. The fact is the ones who have established families here don’t and even a weak magnet attracts. So, all of what you and fred# commented on is great. Cyclical migration is a real phenomena. But it’ll never solve the problem of our porous border. Are you aware the fist 60 or so pages of Rubio’s bill speaks to nothing but securing the border? A commenter above said the first thing one needs to consider with it is ripping the entire thing up. Seems a waste where a lot of thought was put in regards to making the border more secure. I don’t know if I’d support the bill, I was trying to discuss it.

My original post was a simple question to see if anyone knew more than I’d heard up until last night about the bill. An honest question. What I got seems to be a multitude of paranoia from people thinking I’m advocating the GOE’s bill. And a bit more hyperbole that I honestly think was necessary. Holy crap, it garnered a comment from one guy talking about killing 1.3 billion Muslims. Really? No one else jumped on that gem?

Thanks for the continuous education on illegals. But, I’ve been around more of them than you ever will be and I’ve been in worse neighborhoods than you have I’m sure.

The last thing is your commentary on my families specific situation can’t be sugar coated into anything else. It was a dismissive way of implying I couldn’t know what I was talking about on the subject because what, I’m building a new home? It came across like someone throwing something in your face. Again, I wouldn’t use that on a fellow conservative. And I don’t mention it because it’s particularly effective on me, but it speaks volumes about the way we’ve taken to debate each other here. If you think me asking what we’re going to do about 11-12 million illegal aliens is a liberal straw-man, you might want to read your original comment in that regard and ask yourself what it sounds like.